George Tanner

[Red Army 75]

Got to love him. That’s all

[Alan Dicks]

Got a big future ahead of him

[Ivorguy]

1 hour ago, Alan Dicks said:

Got a big future ahead of him

Sadly unlikely to be with us

[Lew-T]

Lost count the number of crosses he blocked. Loves a tackle too!

Brilliant find.

[Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan]

Did well again. Great find.

[And Its Smith]

Very good from him. Not many come out of tonight with credit but he can be proud of how he keeps improving 

[REDOXO]

Tanner was great. Utterly exposed by waht was in front of him. The ball was constantly coming down that side but he did everything he could have done. 

[GrahamC]

I thought all the back 5 battled hard, the penalty aside Baker was excellent.

[cidercity1987]

93% pass accuracy, brilliant

[JoeAman08]

Can’t disagree. Thought he was fantastic. Impressed with his defending 1v1. Coming from Carlisle, it sounded like he was better getting forward than defending. Not the case at all. Looks an excellent defender and some flashes of ability going forward in his few games with us. 

[Guest Hadleigh Red]

Thought he was excellent, loved that full bloodied double tackle. Looks a great signing!

[INCRED]

40 minutes ago, Lew-T said:

Lost count the number of crosses he blocked. Loves a tackle too!

Brilliant find.

He is an outstanding RB. He knows how to defend and you can tell he’s been well schooled in the art of tackling, blocking crosses and positioning himself to not be beaten on the outside or inside and doesn’t dive in and make rash challenges 

Perhaps some our other players should take note, especially NB?

[Dullmoan Tone]

But…. he needs to offer much more going forward.

And if we’re being really negative -his throw ins have been terrible recently- he gave the ball away twice against Bournemouth.

He’s a great prospect but let’s not get carried away  yet!

[054123]

2 hours ago, Red Army 75 said:

Got to love him. That’s all

Yeah, why not.

Made me smile with his tackles.

Even more so than when Scott scored as all I could think was that got him off if the hook for that horrendous miss

[Bris Red]

Looks a decent prospect, always goes into tackles fully committed and looks like he has a lot of heart and endeavour about him. 

[watkins1983]

Hell of a player. That double tackle in the first half was immense. Going to be a city legend. 

[tin]

Tanner is exactly the type of player Nige wants to us to have — young, hungry, potential for growth, versatile. Great signing, and I hope we make more signings like him (eg Prem schooled, released, desire, resale if we don’t match his growth etc).

[Super]

Actually thought on the whole the defence played well. The problems are further forward. Tanner was very good.

[watkins1983]

2 minutes ago, tin said:

Tanner is exactly the type of player Nige wants to us to have — young, hungry, potential for growth, versatile. Great signing, and I hope we make more signings like him (eg Prem schooled, released, desire, resale if we don’t match his growth etc).

Bang on. Atkinson is another example of this. Great signing.  Massengo coming on at a rate of knots. You would think with the balance we have of youth and experience brought in we would be lighting up the league……

[pongo88]

He’s extremely unusual for a modern defender. He can actually tackle!  It will never catch on 

[Loosey Boy]

Outstanding tonight

[big dosser]

give me 11 tanners all day %110 committed i feel this lads is going to go far hopefully with us.

[Davefevs]

I echo what the vast majority above posted.  My City MOTM tonight.

Early days, but he does well one-on-one….he ain’t gonna stop every single one though.

[Pezo]

I found myself trying to console myself on the way home, one way I did this was to think that at least the 2 (4 if you include Baker and Weiman) Pearson signings are good.

[Davefevs]

Potential diamond.  Made a great start to his career here.  He will probably go through a bit of lull at some point, but looks a very quick learner.

[Clutton Caveman]

11 hours ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

Did well again. Great find.

When will he get a song? 

[GrahamC]

11 hours ago, INCRED said:

He is an outstanding RB. He knows how to defend and you can tell he’s been well schooled in the art of tackling, blocking crosses and positioning himself to not be beaten on the outside or inside and doesn’t dive in and make rash challenges 

Perhaps some our other players should take note, especially NB?

The same NB who made an unbelievable clearance off the line first half? Who absolutely battered a couple of theirs with physical challenges?

He made a poor choice by sliding in on Spence but Baker was obviously not the issue last night.

[Taz]

12 hours ago, Super said:

Actually thought on the whole the defence played well. The problems are further forward. Tanner was very good.

Agree 100%. We are in the middle of a rebuild, and at least we now look decent at the back. 

What we need is to now start focusing on the forward options, and start getting the right players for the rest of the positions. 

King isn't a long term answer, and James can't run the midfield by himself. Williams' injury hasn't helped things (again) but I don't see how or where players like Palmer or O'Dowda fit in (and in the case of the latter, it's not upfront!!)

Martin was overplayed last season before his injury, and had probably played more than he expected to at this point in the season so far. 

Realistically if we can finish midtable this season, we've done very well. 

January will be interesting, because I don't see where the money is coming from, however it's blindingly obvious we are short of at least 3 first team signings. If somehow we can get these players in, we may be able to transform into a team that can actually create chances and keep goals out.

For me, the main issue last night was that we tried to be too clever. Taking off all your strikers and leaving O'Dowda as the most advanced player, you were always going to make Forest think that there was something there for them. Especially as we have form for being soft later on....

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially because we should have had a penalty, and could have been an extra goal up if Wells hadn't hit the post. However, when you go in for a tackle like that in your own box, 90 minutes into a game, you need to make sure you are getting all of the ball, and only the ball, because you're opening yourself up for the attacker to go to ground regardless of whether you touch him or not.

[AppyDAZE]

1 minute ago, Taz said:

Agree 100%. We are in the middle of a rebuild, and at least we now look decent at the back. 

What we need is to now start focusing on the forward options, and start getting the right players for the rest of the positions. 

King isn't a long term answer, and James can't run the midfield by himself. Williams' injury hasn't helped things (again) but I don't see how or where players like Palmer or O'Dowda fit in (and in the case of the latter, it's not upfront!!)

Martin was overplayed last season before his injury, and had probably played more than he expected to at this point in the season so far. 

Realistically if we can finish midtable this season, we've done very well. 

January will be interesting, because I don't see where the money is coming from, however it's blindingly obvious we are short of at least 3 first team signings. If somehow we can get these players in, we may be able to transform into a team that can actually create chances and keep goals out.

For me, the main issue last night was that we tried to be too clever. Taking off all your strikers and leaving O'Dowda as the most advanced player, you were always going to make Forest think that there was something there for them. Especially as we have form for being soft later on....

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, especially because we should have had a penalty, and could have been an extra goal up if Wells hadn't hit the post. However, when you go in for a tackle like that in your own box, 90 minutes into a game, you need to make sure you are getting all of the ball, and only the ball, because you're opening yourself up for the attacker to go to ground regardless of whether you touch him or not.

It is worth pointing out that the keeper saved Wells' effort, when you see it again on Sky. The replay shows it clearly.

[AppyDAZE]

2 minutes ago, AppyDAZE said:

It is worth pointing out that the keeper saved Wells' effort, when you see it again on Sky. The replay shows it clearly.

And the player's own reaction after the Scott incident also points to a guilty player.

He stops running expecting a pen.

Edited October 20, 2021 by AppyDAZE

[Super]

1 minute ago, AppyDAZE said:

It is worth pointing out that the keeper saved Wells' effort, when you see it again on Sky. The replay shows it clearly.

It was a superb save.

[AppyDAZE]

And thinking back, I maybe wrong, we didn't get a corner from it. Poor officials last night.

Edited October 20, 2021 by AppyDAZE

[Fuber]

12 hours ago, watkins1983 said:

Bang on. Atkinson is another example of this. Great signing.  Massengo coming on at a rate of knots. You would think with the balance we have of youth and experience brought in we would be lighting up the league……

We have good potential players in defence and midfield, such as the above.

However for each prospect playing well, the more experienced squad members are letting them down.

[Sturny]

I hope we put on a release clause. Reckon he's gonna play in the prem someday.

Feels like it's been aaaaages since we've had a right back with high potential. 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Sturny

[brad blit]

People talking about January buys but I’m presuming that FFP rules won’t change in Jan, and it would still be the case that City have limited funds - unless revenue from start of season to Jan (with gate receipts etc) can be used and give us a transfer kitty? Any idea @Davefevs

[James54De]

20 minutes ago, Sturny said:

I hope we put on a release clause. Reckon he's gonna play in the prem someday.

Feels like it's been aaaaages since we've had a right back with high potential. 

Why

[Super]

16 minutes ago, brad blit said:

People talking about January buys but I’m presuming that FFP rules won’t change in Jan, and it would still be the case that City have limited funds - unless revenue from start of season to Jan (with gate receipts etc) can be used and give us a transfer kitty? Any idea @Davefevs

Probably loan signings.

[Sturny]

19 minutes ago, James54De said:

Why

To make sure we get enough dough if we sell

[Fuber]

3 minutes ago, Sturny said:

To make sure we get enough dough if we sell

That doesn't make sense.

Release clauses are dodgy unless your aim is to keep a player and you set it to a hugely unrealistic level. Let's say hypothetically we out on a release clause of say £8m.

All that does is mean if he's worth £10m (assuming that could happen) we'd be losing profit.

With respect Sturny, I'm glad you aren't in charge of contract clauses. 

Trust the Club. Selling players is one area where I'd argue we've conducted good business the past 5 years.

[Sturny]

8 minutes ago, Fuber said:

That doesn't make sense.

Release clauses are dodgy unless your aim is to keep a player and you set it to a hugely unrealistic level. Let's say hypothetically we out on a release clause of say £8m.

All that does is mean if he's worth £10m (assuming that could happen) we'd be losing profit.

With respect Sturny, I'm glad you aren't in charge of contract clauses. 

Trust the Club. Selling players is one area where I'd argue we've conducted good business the past 5 years.

But on the other side of the argument let’s say he’s worth 5m and it pushes them to 8m? I see your point though and fair enough, I won’t send my CV over 

Edited October 20, 2021 by Sturny

[Fuber]

Just now, Sturny said:

But on the other side of the argument let’s say he’s worth 5m and it pushes them to 8m? I see your point though and fair enough 

My understanding is that said release clauses tend to be up front. Which is less useful from an FFP standpoint.

I.e. Webster was £19m rising to £24m with clauses, said £19m was split in three equal installments.

Similar with Kelly.

Whereas if we wanted money up front we likely would have got less.

[Sturny]

Just now, Fuber said:

My understanding is that said release clauses tend to be up front. Which is less useful from an FFP standpoint.

I.e. Webster was £19m rising to £24m with clauses, said £19m was split in three equal installments.

Similar with Kelly.

Whereas if we wanted money up front we likely would have got less.

Didn’t know that tbh, fair doo’s 

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, brad blit said:

People talking about January buys but I’m presuming that FFP rules won’t change in Jan, and it would still be the case that City have limited funds - unless revenue from start of season to Jan (with gate receipts etc) can be used and give us a transfer kitty? Any idea @Davefevs

Both Gould and Pearson have come out recently and said there is not likely to be much activity in January….unless we sell.  I’d say we might get another “one for the future” like Tanner type signing, but not expecting much more, maybe a loan?

2 hours ago, Sturny said:

But on the other side of the argument let’s say he’s worth 5m and it pushes them to 8m? I see your point though and fair enough, I won’t send my CV over 

Not having a go at you, just adding my thoughts.  I don’t think as a Championship club you sign a 21 year old from Lg2 for £300k on a 3yr contract (plus 1 year option) and slap a whopping release fee in the contract.  What benefit does it really serve at this point for either player or club?  It might be a consideration the next time his contract is discussed, but likely to be on player’s agenda not ours, i.e. he might think he’s gonna outgrow us and doesn’t want us restricting him if a better club comes in.

With Josh Brownhill, the release fee was for his benefit not City’s at the time Burnley came knocking.  City having to sell when they didn’t want to, in the market of the time, he’d outgrown his release fee in reality….and we had to twist rather than stick.

Think it’s less common at our level, very useful for PL players fearing being kept at a relegated club.  All a bit Football Manager to me.

2 hours ago, Fuber said:

My understanding is that said release clauses tend to be up front. Which is less useful from an FFP standpoint.

I.e. Webster was £19m rising to £24m with clauses, said £19m was split in three equal installments.

Similar with Kelly.

Whereas if we wanted money up front we likely would have got less.

Correct, pretty much fee agreed, then payment terms discussed.  If you wanna make staged payments, the total paid will be more (generally).

Staged payments make no difference to FFP, the fee is fee pretty much.

[Bazooka Joe]

Tanner is the sort of player who offers hope of better things and a brighter future for our club.

He knows what is expected of him and he delivers as best he can. Hard-working, commited and energetic.

Attackers find it hard to get any change out of him.

If we had eleven Tanners, we'd have five shillings and sixpence.

He is definitely going to worth a fair few bob more than we paid for him.

[22A]

20 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Tanner was great. Utterly exposed by waht was in front of him. The ball was constantly coming down that side but he did everything he could have done. 

Not just last night either; he's playing consistently well.